Just in…. Frank McKenna will not seek the leadership of the Liberal Party. The revelation opens many interesting possibilities and more than likely rules out a one horse race. It is not that McKenna would not be a capable sort for the job, it is just that a fairly large group of former Martin strategists were looking to latch on to McKenna’s popular appeal and keep control of the party. Instead, this might actually lead to a process with many candidates, new blood and old and a very healthy process of renewal on the way to picking a new leader.
Comments For This Post Topic Was Disable By Author
Geeze Throbbin,
I posted this exactly 30 secs ago. Couldn’t you have waited an hour or so before bringing out the “I told ya so’s”? :)
Sorry man, but I was waiting for this post as I caught the article on cbc.ca about half an hour ago.
If nomulated I will not rum: if ejected, I will not Serb.
Ejection is a distinct possibility after that comment. :)
The bad news is that with Manley and McKenna out, my flowchart connecting Lieberals to Satan is getting seriously obsolete.
Yes Buzz, I can see how this might upset the flow of Satan’s greater game plan. That is quite a chart you came up with.
I’m thinking you are good fun at parties. :)
PeterP, is the right as scared as I think they should be on this whole “regrouping” by the Liberal party?
I know they will not discuss their fears openly, but is there that feeling of helplessness and apprehension that I think there is regarding the next Liberal Leader and election?
I don’t think anyone’s too worried about the Liberals in the next few years. Martin was billed as the savior of the party when he was corinated, and well, it’s still in bad need of saving. Quebec support will be key for them, and most of the pundits are descibing the length of time that will take in years, and lots of them.
Parties also have to consider what they consider a “star candidate” and what the rest of the country thinks. Cutler? Ignatief? Summerville? Let’s be serious here, outside the realm of politics these names mean very little.
I hate to admit it but the Liberals could learn alot about picking a leader by observing the Conservatives dedication to promoting Harper. A boring guy, horrible on camera (yes, yes, I know, getting better); a self described policy wonk. But with relentless, old school campaigning, he managed to make the country comfortable with calling him Prime Minister. I think the Liberals should avoid the flashy “celebrity” leadership types and follow suit. Someone that will present the parties platform and let it be the center of attention.
Chances of the Liberals taking this route in my opinion? Slim to none.
>I know they will not discuss their fears openly, but is there that feeling of helplessness and apprehension that I think there is regarding the next Liberal Leader and election?
You’re projecting your own feelings onto others. Helplessness and apprehension is what opponents of “the right” feel while their political foes are in office. What “the right” generally feels while Liberals are in office is ranges from indifference to resignation and disgust.
I don’t think I am projecting my emotions onto others. In fact, speaking with fellow Liberals, there is a palpable excitement about the upcoming leadership convention and what comes after that.
A time of renewal and reconcialiation is actually something many of us have been waiting for for a long time. No messing up this time.
And Tobins gone too! Hmmph….interesting.
Well, we have at least two Liberal party insiders as regulars on this site. Come on, dudes, what’s the scoop?
“the scoop”
Hard to say at this point Balb. My guess is as good as yours but I would venture that the reluctance of three star candidates to not run might be due to:
1) Speaking French well and being able to not only appeal to Quebecors again but also to perhaps be able to fight another battle on sovereignty.
2) The Liberal Party is a mess financially and be in real trouble if the Conservatives decided to overturn the current the election finance laws giving each party $1.75 per vote and limiting corporate donations.
3) Lack of a viable network within the party. Martin’s cronies have an unprecedented grip on the levers from the riding association executives on up.
4) Something odd is going on behind the scenes that has not yet surfaced. For example, when McKenna resigned as our Ambassador to the US last week, it was almost obvious that he was considering a run at the leadership. Something convinced him not do so between now and then. Manley never had a chance and I think he knew that. Tobin on the other hand, like McKenna is a surprise. There must be some networks forming and candidates jockeying for position.
Anyway, just a few guesses but at this stage it is looking like it will be a Dion, Ignatieff showdown with plenty of other candidates in the running.
The answer is rather simple. Manley, McKenna, and Tobin all have wives. Wife is offered choice of hubby making perhaps $200,000.00 a year, living in drafty Stornaway, and having huge amounts of abuse hurled at hubby and the family all with no guarentee of winning the prize. Or hubby can bill $2,000,000.00 on Bay Street, you get to go to all the right parties and drink stag’s Leap with dinner. All three have all ready served their country, and the wives made sacrifices during that time. ’nuff said. Next question.
I suspect the money and current careers has more to do with it than the wives. I find it difficult to believe that some if not all might not relish in the idea of possibly being the “first lady” in Canada, no matter what that might bring with it in terms of media scrutiny and time.
If I were a power hungry and/or a money-grubber of a wife (there are days I wish I were, so I speak from honest fantasy land.) then I would question the logic of Don’s theory. My thinking is that my hubby would pull in a heck of a lot more cash on the circuit when he can add Prime Minister to his resume. I’m sure Mila and her kids had it rough for a few years. But they seem to be doing just fine now.
There are plenty of women that would seek the role of Leader if not “wife” of Leader. I’ve often marvelled at their tenacity and drive, from a distance, but its gotta be cutthroat and tough to stick out. It’s just my observation but – girls can play a vicious game. Now don’t get me wrong men can be equally aggressive, cunning, and manipulative to win …but women do play the game differentl, especially between each other.
I think the truth lies somewhere between the reality that the next leader has a heck of a job to do. And I honestly get the feeling that there is a huge collective shrug going on. The Party is tired. There is apathy within the rank-and-file, if you will.
I honestly don’t think Tobin, who reminds me of a spoiled child, was prepared to roll up his sleeves and muck about with the dirty masses. He’s a glory seeker in my humble opinion. This is not the time for that.
Manley, I have always admired, even if he does look like Beaker. I think he knows it would be a long shot and he’s tired and perhaps he learned from the last race that his skin is just not thick enough to take the hits. I think that is a good quality in a person.
Mckenna is different though. I think something did happen there. So if I were an insider I would be watching whom he speaks with or where he goes for clues.
In the meantime my guy with the flashy red socks has a better chance. But personally I am paying attention to Akaash. I like his dream for a Liberal Party but I just don’t want to be suckered in again. One day in the future (the person after this one maybe…) I’d like to see Akaash run for Prime Minister….I’d even give over my guy Martin for him……One day…

I told ya so, I told ya so…